Key result
Parachute device shows 3-year safety and feasibility in ischemic HF with ~39% death or HF hospitalization.
Why the study?
Does percutaneous ventricular restoration using the Parachute device demonstrate safety and feasibility in patients with ischemic heart failure?
Observational (n=39)
Yes
Does percutaneous ventricular restoration using the Parachute device demonstrate safety and feasibility in patients with ischemic heart failure?
Percutaneous ventricular restoration using the Parachute device appears safe and feasible up to 3 years in patients with ischemic heart failure, with significant reductions in left ventricular end-diastolic volume.
Supports device feasibility in ischemic HF up to 3 years; leaves open efficacy versus medical therapy pending RCTs.
BACKGROUND: Left ventricle remodeling after anterior wall myocardial infarction leads to increased left ventricle volumes, myocardial stress, and ultimately heart failure (HF). Treatment options are limited for these high-risk HF patients. A study was conducted to assess safety and feasibility of a percutaneous ventricular restoration therapy using the Parachute device in subjects with HF because of a cardiac ischemic event. METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-nine subjects with New York Heart Association class II to IV ischemic HF, ejection fraction between 15% and 40%, and dilated akinetic or dyskinetic anterior-apical wall without the need to be revascularized were enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter investigation testing percutaneous ventricular restoration using the Parachute device. The safety primary end point was defined as successful procedure without device-related major adverse cardiac events during 6 months. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were obtained at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months post-treatment. Echocardiographic and end point data were adjudicated independently. Of the 39 subjects enrolled, device implantation was attempted in 34 and successful in 31 patients. Twenty-three subjects reached 3 years post-treatment with the device implanted. New York Heart Association symptom class was improved or maintained in 85% of subjects. Left ventricle end-diastolic volume index and end-systolic volume index were reduced from 128.4±22.1 and 94.9±22.3 mL/m(2) preimplant to 115.2±23.1 and 87.3±18.7 mL/m(2) at 3-year follow-up (end-diastolic volume index, P=0.0056; end-systolic volume index, P=0.4719). The cumulative incidence of HF hospitalization or death was 16.1%, 32.3%, and 38.7% at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. By 3-year follow-up, 2 (6.5%) of 31 patients with successful implant had died from cardiac reasons, with no cardiac deaths occurring past 6 months post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The first series of ischemic HF patients treated with percutaneous ventricular restoration using the Parachute device demonstrates feasibility and safety of the device ≤3 years post-treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00573560 (US patients) and NCT01286116 (EU patients).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Costa et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Ischemic Heart Failure (n=39). Parachute device was evaluated on Successful procedure without device-related major adverse cardiac events during 6 months. Percutaneous ventricular restoration using the Parachute device was feasible and safe up to 3 years in ischemic heart failure, with a 38.7% cumulative incidence of HF hospitalization or death.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: